Congress split as Senate nears vote on Iran strikes
Members of the House and Senate gave differing assessments of their case for war, falling almost entirely along party lines from secret briefings with senior administration officials on Tuesday.
Democrats said the president and his team failed to articulate an imminent threat that would justify taking action without consulting Congress, while Republicans largely stood by the president’s decision — though some warned their support could waver if the conflict escalates.
“I’m really concerned about mission creep,” said Sen. Chuck Schumer, the minority leader, as he emerged from a classified briefing with Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Dan Caine. He said the closed meeting was “very unsatisfactory” and that the administration gave “different answers every day” about why the president ordered the attack on Iran.
Republicans largely praised the operation, which they said previous presidents were unwilling to launch to eliminate the threat posed by Iran. Some have warned that a prolonged military campaign could erode that support.
“I’ve never felt better about how this is going to end,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-S.C., who emerged from the briefing and concluded by praising the administration’s actions and reasoning.
The partisan disagreement comes ahead of a Senate vote expected Wednesday and a similar vote in the House of Representatives scheduled for Thursday on measures that would limit Trump’s ability to continue using military force in Iran without express authorization from Congress. Both were expected to fail, given nearly unanimous opposition from Republicans. But the debate would leave a deep well of concern and uncertainty expressed on Capitol Hill about Trump’s decision to launch what he and his advisers have described as a potentially open-ended conflict in the Middle East without consulting the legislature.
Rubio, who attended the second day of closed meetings with lawmakers on Tuesday, said that the United States was preparing to intensify attacks against Iran in the coming days. He warned Americans in the region about the risk of retaliatory attacks and urged them to leave the area as airports closed and embassy staff evacuated.
Rubio backtracked on that logic a day after arguing that the decision to strike Iran was made primarily because of Israel’s plan to attack the country, leaving U.S. interests vulnerable to retaliation. Trump has determined that the threat posed by Iran’s growing weapons arsenal poses an imminent danger to Americans in the region, he said Tuesday.
But in a legally required letter to Congress, Trump argued that he ordered the sweeping airstrikes to advance national interests and eliminate Iran as a global threat, contradicting his own officials’ claims that it was an imminent threat. The letter stated that the attack was aimed at “neutralizing Iran’s malign activities.”
Many MPs left the closed-door briefing expressing deep skepticism about the rationale.
“We have no additional information about what the imminent threat is,” said Rep. Pramila Jayapal, D-Wash. “There were many references to Iran’s 47-year-old problem being a problem. This is not something that will happen anytime soon. It is in the past. Its imminence means an immediate threat to the United States.”
Rep. Sara Jacobs, D-Calif., said administration officials “pushed back on the idea that Israel had reported the timing. But then they said it was as if Israel had reported the timing. So it was all very inconsistent.”
Republican leaders have struggled to repeat the administration’s contradictory statements. On Monday, House Speaker Mike Johnson told reporters after the first classified briefing for Rubio and congressional leaders that the “great concern” was that U.S. troops could be the target of retaliatory strikes by Iran following the Israeli attack.
“We would have suffered staggering losses,” Johnson said. “And if we had waited to respond before taking first action, then those losses would have been much greater.”
But he reiterated Rubio’s new statement when he told reporters on Tuesday: “This is really a very simple issue. It’s about building ballistic missiles. That’s what Iran was doing. And they were doing it at a speed and scale that exceeded the ability of our regional allies to respond appropriately. This created an imminent and serious threat.” He never mentioned Israel.
Still, even as they prepare to vote against the measure that would rein in Trump’s war powers, some Republicans have suggested their positions could change if military action is expanded or prolonged.
“I’ll answer no for now, but if this goes beyond a few weeks, I’ll have a lot more concerns,” Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., said after Tuesday’s briefing. He added that his concerns would increase if US troops were deployed in Iran, but noted: “We’re not at that point today. That’s not what I heard in the briefing.”
Rep. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., said senior officials “addressed many of the members’ concerns.” But he said the deployment of U.S. troops to Iran would “indicate a deeper level of engagement” where many lawmakers “will want greater involvement from Congress.”
Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., also said his support could change if U.S. troops are deployed in the field. “I’m going to vote no on the war powers resolution because I think they’re lawful and the law gives them 60 days,” he said, given Rubio’s briefings and notifications to Congress about the operation.
Both resolutions reference the 1973 War Powers Resolution, which prohibits U.S. armed forces from engaging in hostilities for more than 60 days without congressional authorization or a declaration of war.
Some Democrats, including Sen. John Fetterman of Pennsylvania, have signaled they will oppose the effort. Fetterman said last weekend that he said “absolutely no” to the decision.
In the House, Reps. Josh Gottheimer of New Jersey, Jared Moskowitz of Florida and Greg Landsman of Ohio have said they will oppose the effort. Instead, they plan to submit an alternative resolution that would give the president 30 days to end the operation against Iran before seeking authorization from Congress.
